Who made this AV? It's "incredible"

I met this guy a few nights ago around my place. He couldn't remember who made the AV. I want Elastigirl!

Any woman that can bend her ankles round her shoulders TWICE scares me...

Men that can do that DON'T scare you????

Nah cause we can use them as a basket ball and they wont complain when someone yells Foul ....Dribbling...

I think I can come close to answering that. His name is Max something...and I think his last name might be McGruff or something that starts with an M...his first name is definitely Max though. You should see some of his stuff....he has a Steamboat Willie, Minnie and Mickey Mouse, and a BUNCH of others...they are all PERFECT. Look him up...I really can't remember his last name.

Ewwwwwwwwwww

Max DeGroot -- he does very good work. He has a vendor at the Plush mall in Orient.

Just another plug for Max - everything I've seen of his is awesome!

Check out his B&W Mickey & Minnie mouse AV's

Well...I had the Max right...lol

Ah, I met Max a week or two ago. He was in a great looking Goofy av. Very talented.

Yup, that's my AV. There are others who have made Mister Incredible as well. I have 8 vendors on SL thus far, and new AVs to come.

Yes, yes...Elastic Girl will be one of them.

I made a replica HEV from Half-Life in 2003 and Lee told me not to wear it 'cause it infringes on Valve's intellectual property rights. You should probably avoid making/selling anything copyrighted.

I have been thinking about this same thing ever since I read this thread. I wonder what would happen if a company all of a sudden decides to look into SL for any copyright violations and decides to sue a player? I have taken some steps already by slowly eliminating items that might fall into this category (even if these items were created before intellectual rights were implemented in SL). Not trying to hijack the thread, just really curious as to what many creators will do if someone gets sued, if it hasn't happened already given the popularity of SL and all the new articles being written about it.

Thankfully I don't think any big companies would waste there time's on a buncha dorks like us =)

Don't be so sure...
It's not about how much money they can get or how much time they will spend, it's about enforcing their rights. As I understand it, many companies will enforce their trademarks and copyrights given that any lack of enforcement might make them open for abuse later on and/or a court considering that they have lost their rights given the lack of enforcement (I know it's confusing, but bear with me) . For example, if a company finds a user selling goods based on their creations (movie characters, cartoons, RL toys like Legos, etc.) and they let it slide thinking that this is not worthwhile, they could lose their rights to try and enforce it later on if they find someone making similar items elsewhere and gaining a profit as well. This is the main reason why many companies will go after others for copyright or trademark violations, even if they case seems petty or not worth their time (e.g. Penny Arcade being sued for making a parody of a game using a drawing of a girl similar to Strawberry Shortcake and the more recent lawsuit against City of Heroes by Marvel).

=O

But he's not selling them for actual money, right? He's just making them available to other people for game money. I would think to them that would be considered monopoly money or something similiar to that.
If not it's time to start fearing copyright laws in alot of games.

But he could (and maybe does) sell those L$ profits on GOM* to make US$.

The way I read copyright regulations, you are allowed to copy things for your own personal use/enjoyment, but must not in any way infringe on the ability of the copyright owner to continue selling their product. ie, your kids can paint a picture of their favorite cartoon hero, but if you printed off thousands of copies and sold them as posters you'd be breaking copyright.


* other currency exchanges are available.

I sometimes have to deal with copyright issues at work. From what I understand, if you change the product enough, sometimes it doesn't even have to be all that much, you can avoid copyright infringement problems.

You could argue that the hair on this AV isn't exactly the same, the shape of the feet... It's sort of subjective though.

This is where you get into the areas of derivative works... Are you taking a copyrighted/patented product and changing it to become a different product which you pass as being your own work, or are you trying to copy the original copyrighted product?

I think the first. Often we need a product to have the same look and feel without being exactly the same if we're "subbing" items in our product line. There's a fine line though, one we don't like to get too close to.

Actually they could slam him on mere naming conventions alone however, thats a bit more speculative. Thus til it happens I guess he is safe but if he is the first one to be sued by Disney as we all know Disney is so Anal retentive then Id be worrying about CRI.

Shadow

Maybe he should rename it "Mr. Incredulous"

Actually..."Mr. I" would be better then he could infer any one of a few thousand words starting with the letter I. Like "Mr. Insanity" for example...hehe.

Derivative works are illegal to sell as well, at least in the USA. =(

Who is the av with the tiny robot?

Two little robot feet coming out of what looks like a TV, all rusted with gears and robot arms on the side.

That av is faaantastic